For medium- and large-format films, developers are not critical. DK-50, DK-60a and similar commercial developers based on a combination of metol and hydroquinone as developing agents were deservedly popular for decades. For miniature film, superior results were obtained from D-76, and later, Microphen, UFG, Acufine, and similar products that used Phenidone compared to the commercial type developers. Paterson developers (formulated by Geoffrey Crawley) were even better. Acutol, Acutol-S (FX-15), Acuspecial (for slow films), and more recently FX-39 are probably the best developers ever formulated. I use FX-15 and have every confidence that it is among the best formulas for fast films, which I use almost exclusively.

Ornello wrote:For medium- and large-format films, developers are not critical. DK-50, DK-60a and similar commercial developers based on a combination of metol and hydroquinone as developing agents were deservedly popular for decades.

For miniature film, superior results were obtained from D-76, and later, Microphen, UFG, Acufine, and similar products that used Phenidone compared to the commercial type developers.

I use FX-15 and have every confidence that it is among the best formulas for fast films, which I use almost exclusively.

Unfortunately, Paterson have recently ceased selling developers and other processing solutions.
A developer I have played around with is sort of a sharpened up "one-shot" Microphen type similar to FX-37, but with slower development which I prefer. I will post it here if there is anyone interested. It take PQ-Borax to the next logical stage as a one-shot developer instead of the usual high sulphite formulas designed to be reused and replenished.

I had a discussion with a senior Ilford research manager over lunch on a visit to Mobberley back in the early 1980s and we touched on Paterson chemistry, what he had to say was quite an eye-opener. He'd been involved in the manufacture of Paterson chemistry as it was originally manufactered by Ilford for the company.

Unlike you I don't particularly rate any Paterson chemistry and I tried and tested many of their developers and also some Crawley's published formulae. There wasn't a product that was exceptional and any better than products already on the market.

IanG wrote:I had a discussion with a senior Ilford research manager over lunch on a visit to Mobberley back in the early 1980s and we touched on Paterson chemistry, what he had to say was quite an eye-opener. He'd been involved in the manufacture of Paterson chemistry as it was originally manufactered by Ilford for the company.

Unlike you I don't particularly rate any Paterson chemistry and I tried and tested many of their developers and also some Crawley's published formulae. There wasn't a product that was exceptional and any better than products already on the market.

Ian

Ian, I also heard from an Ilford employee that they once made Paterson chemistry for them under license. He mentioned something about a certain component in a developer which was so diluted already, that they all wondered what it was supposed to do.

The formula I mentioned in my previous post that I played around with for a while is as follows;

The working strength developer is made up just before use by diluting 1 part of the stock solution with 3 parts of water (1+3) and is used once only. For guide times, I started with those given for Ilford Microphen when Microphen is diluted 1+1.
It actually works quite well believe it or not. I am currently doing myself a project of photographing the ancient stone crosses on Dartmoor.

Ornello wrote:For medium- and large-format films, developers are not critical. DK-50, DK-60a and similar commercial developers based on a combination of metol and hydroquinone as developing agents were deservedly popular for decades.

For miniature film, superior results were obtained from D-76, and later, Microphen, UFG, Acufine, and similar products that used Phenidone compared to the commercial type developers.

I use FX-15 and have every confidence that it is among the best formulas for fast films, which I use almost exclusively.

Unfortunately, Paterson have recently ceased selling developers and other processing solutions.
A developer I have played around with is sort of a sharpened up "one-shot" Microphen type similar to FX-37, but with slower development which I prefer. I will post it here if there is anyone interested. It take PQ-Borax to the next logical stage as a one-shot developer instead of the usual high sulphite formulas designed to be reused and replenished.

I tested many films and developers in the late 1960s and 1970s. Nothing, at that time, beat FP4 in Acutol for overall quality (even though slower films were finer-grained, they had restricted tonality). This was before the improved FP4 came out. Tri-X was better than HP4, and both FP4 and Tri-X developed for the same times (3.5 minutes, I believe) in UFG, which I used a lot too. I used Tri-X about 70% of the time, and FP4 the rest of the time. When I wanted to do critical work I used FP4 in Acutol, and occasionally tried super-slow films (such as KB-14) in Acuspecial (which was overwhelmingly superior to Rodinal). FP4 was sharper and finer-grained than Plus-X, and Tri-X was superior to HP4. In the late 1970s and early 1980s Ilford improved all of their films (with the "Plus" designation). Thereafter, HP5 was in no way inferior to Tri-X. But my point is that the Paterson developers were clearly the best, and by a considerable margin.

it is a pity that Paterson ceased their production of photochemicals incl. the FX series because FX-39 was never published by G. Crawley due to commercial reasons.
But FX-37 is indeed very, very close to it which was a published formulae. FX-1 and FX-2, also very interesting. That Pina-Cryptol (Yellow) I once put it away which was a stupid action.